Podfox: First Container-Aware Browser (opens in new tab)

(val.packett.cool)

116 pointspierremenard1y ago17 comments

17 comments

15 comments · 7 top-level

amarshall1y ago· 4 in thread

Unfortunately page is completely blank (iOS Safari)

zamadatix1y ago

Same, here's an archive https://web.archive.org/web/20250509050906/https://val.packe...

wingmanjd1y ago

Blank for me too (Windows Firefox), ublock off.

conception1y ago

Turn off your content blockers? Comes up fine for me. Or maybe add some? ;)

prmoustache1y ago

I have firefox and content blockers and it works fine for me. On Linux.

Maybe they simply banned some user agents commonly used by IA scrapers.

CGamesPlay1y ago· 2 in thread

The project being discussed in this post is https://codeberg.org/valpackett/podfox#podfox

You can actually use Traefik to do something similar using its Docker service discovery. Instead of being a SOCKS proxy, Traefik is a reverse proxy, and you can combine with `lvh.me` which resolves all subdomains to localhost. I don't use this technique any more, but a functional example command can be seen here: https://github.com/CGamesPlay/dotfiles/blob/c49e2b4ddd0fe591...

hobofan1y ago

I think that puts it into an entirely different category. SOCKS proxies are great, as they don't require you to try and bend all domain names the correct way. In a typical intranet or proxied container cluster setup, you quickly end up hitting some application logic that e.g. returns back an absolute URL (breaking your manual usage of lvh.me), or uses non-default HTTP ports, or one of many other ways that break if you try to use a lvh.me-like setup or remapping DNS entries to localhost.

CGamesPlay1y ago

You're correct, but in practice I never had that issue. All the applications I used this technique with were easily able to set the "site root URL" via an environment variable or something similar.

To show the other side of the coin: SOCKS proxies are less convenient, as they require you to configure your entire browser (your entire system on macOS) to use it.

2 more replies

sureglymop1y ago· 2 in thread

With regular docker or podman it was always easy and useful to forward a containers port over ssh. Does anyone know how to just as easily do that (i.e. with a single command) for rootless podman?

yjftsjthsd-h1y ago

With or without binding a host port? With a host port it should Just Work, without... I'm not sure why it wouldn't route just as well, actually; I don't think `ssh -L` acts differently than anything else, does it? Actually let me back up: What are you doing, and what does it currently do with podman?

sureglymop1y ago

Without binding a host port. I have a remote server where my containers run and want to forward their ports directly to my local machine without binding to a host port there. That of course works with a regular bridge but not with rootless containers.

hobofan1y ago

For managing SOCKS proxy usage in the browser, I can highly recommend FoxyProxy[0]. I'm using it for about a dozen different SOCKS proxy setups, and it also exists for both Firefox and Chrome, making it easy to share a similar setup with colleagues.

[0]: https://getfoxyproxy.org

jbverschoor1y ago

I dunno. I just use orbstack and everything works. Containers have their own IP, dns, and https certificates

discardedrefuse1y ago

This is such a great post full of cool little tricks for immutable OS users. Thanks for posting!

sibilantcinder1y ago

Very cool. This proxy should be a Podman feature.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

17 comments

15 comments · 7 top-level

amarshall1y ago· 4 in thread

Unfortunately page is completely blank (iOS Safari)

zamadatix1y ago

Same, here's an archive https://web.archive.org/web/20250509050906/https://val.packe...

wingmanjd1y ago

Blank for me too (Windows Firefox), ublock off.

conception1y ago

Turn off your content blockers? Comes up fine for me. Or maybe add some? ;)

prmoustache1y ago

I have firefox and content blockers and it works fine for me. On Linux.

Maybe they simply banned some user agents commonly used by IA scrapers.

CGamesPlay1y ago· 2 in thread

The project being discussed in this post is https://codeberg.org/valpackett/podfox#podfox

hobofan1y ago

CGamesPlay1y ago

You're correct, but in practice I never had that issue. All the applications I used this technique with were easily able to set the "site root URL" via an environment variable or something similar.

To show the other side of the coin: SOCKS proxies are less convenient, as they require you to configure your entire browser (your entire system on macOS) to use it.

2 more replies

sureglymop1y ago· 2 in thread

With regular docker or podman it was always easy and useful to forward a containers port over ssh. Does anyone know how to just as easily do that (i.e. with a single command) for rootless podman?

yjftsjthsd-h1y ago

sureglymop1y ago

hobofan1y ago

[0]: https://getfoxyproxy.org

jbverschoor1y ago

I dunno. I just use orbstack and everything works. Containers have their own IP, dns, and https certificates

discardedrefuse1y ago

This is such a great post full of cool little tricks for immutable OS users. Thanks for posting!

sibilantcinder1y ago

Very cool. This proxy should be a Podman feature.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse